A Genderqueer-Vegan Dinner Party: Logos & Will

Vegans are extreme. The sermons on veganism I’ve had the pleasure of hearing either rest on some variation of National Socialism or Communism. The extreme-Right vegans often have some Hindu or Pagan justification, and the hard-Left variety have some new-age ethical justification. Unfortunately, as I knocked on the front door, I knew I was to meet the latter kind. They are almost as irritating to me as antinatalists, and both need to grow up and eat a steak.

Before dinner we sat about with some wine (Adam: “How bourgeois, you fecking normling reeeee etc. etc…”) and it was the usual bourgeois-liberal moaning about El Presidente. There were six of us, and only myself and my old friend avoided getting dragged into trivial quarrelling about 2016. People sometimes ask me why I even bother meeting “the enemy” and I sometimes ask myself that. The reason is, I suppose, that I hope I can try to have a good relationship with the person behind the ideology. Political ideology is very twentieth century and I see our century as being one of spirituality, not politics. I can go into the lion’s den so you, m’dear reader, don’t have to.

Two of the Leftists were new-age pseudo-philosophers and the rants receded for a brief moment of good conversation. It was a conversation about dreams and lucid dreaming. Personal religion, that is, “I am spiritual but not religious.” I asked what that meant and received an earful of new-age mumbo jumbo.

The two forces in the universe are Logos and Will. Individualist “religions,” “spirituality,” and pseudo-philosophy are the supremacy of Will over Logos. In Martin Heidegger‘s Being and Time, λόγος is taken not only as language, as speech or “word,” “Ἐν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ λόγος” (John 1:1), but also as the signification of both relation and relationship. Logos is grasping and exhibiting which allows things to be revealed to us and so, to Heidegger, not only the language used in reasoning but reason also. Language doesn’t cover up truth in a duality between reality and language as in the early-Wittgensteinian sense but it reveals truth. In Testis Gratus‘ cogent article, “On Logos,” he provides the reader two passages from the Bible: “τῷ λόγῳ τοῦ Κυρίου οἱ οὐρανοὶ ἐστερεώθησαν καὶ τῷ πνεύματι τοῦ στόματος αὐτοῦ πᾶσα ἡ δύναμις αὐτῶν” (Psalms 32:6) and “Κύριος ἔκτισέ [or ἐκτήσατο] με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ, πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐθεμελίωσέ με ἐν ἀρχῇ, πρὸ τοῦ τὴν γῆν ποιῆσαι” (Proverbs 8:22-23) which demonstrate how Biblical Logos “not only marks a dynamic creative speech, but also the knowledge, or Wisdom, that this spoken word reveals.” And so, from Aristotle, to John, to Heidegger, Logos has been at the root of all. Logos is the mind of God, the divine order, and foundation of thought.

The question of Logos is considered as little as the questions of “Being” and our own Being; we say “I am” with absolute confidence. “Inquiry, as a kind of seeking, must be guided before hand by what is sought,” writes Heidegger. We are Dasein, being conscious of oun own existence, and when we say “I” we assume it despite not knowing precisely what it is, our seeking of “I” is guided by that “I” we seek. Asking “What am I?” poses the same problems as asking “What is Being?”; we keep, conceptually in our minds an idea of what “am,” “I,” “is,” and “Being” are, but we are unable to “fix conceptually” what these things signify, and unable even to decide upon a horizon by which these things are to be grasped. However, to Heidegger, “this vague average understanding of Being is still a fact.” Heidegger asserted that ontological inquiry presupposed Being for nearly all of Western philosophy, and this is not problematic in itself, as it is not problematic to presuppose that “I exist,” so long as we accept our own “vague understanding” and subordinate the ego to higher forces — to Logos.

“Why should I follow a religion?” she whines, “Who has the right to tell me what is right and wrong?” “I don’t need religion.” She couldn’t see, despite what I told her, that the “I” she imagines to be herself is not the totality of herself but only her ego or what she imagines herself to be. So many in modernity believe that their conscious Will, or ego, is what they are. She emphatically asserted her Will over Logos, subordinating everything to her”self” despite only having a “vague average understanding” of it.

Immanuel Kant‘s æsthetic theory demonstrates that the joy of music is from the order of the ethereal “music” harmonising with the order of our mind. Effectively, we subordinate Will to Logos — the divine order of the universe — and experience the joy of music as the product of the order of Logos while in a state of disinterestedness. When we listen to music, we are taken from an ordered chord into chaos. We move between keys, we feel tension, longing, and dissonance until we return home in a cadence. The joy of music is order overcoming chaos, the divine order is supreme over the chaos of Will and ego.

J.S. Bach features more times on the Voyager Golden Record than any other composer and an excellent example of what I describe in the paragraph above is the Well-Tempered Clavier. The first prelude in C is also on the Voyager record I believe. We leave order and drift into blended pastels of the human experience only to return in sublime and ethereal resolution.

As in music so in drama. We can watch the tragedies of Prometheus Bound or King Lear and feel rejuvenated and refreshed not despite their morbid themes but because of them. Why is it that we derive pleasure from requiems and laments in music, but also ghostly aberrations, and mass death in drama? The feeling is catharsis. Aristotle describes κάθαρσις παθημάτων in his Poetics. We are purged and refreshed by tragic music and drama from the resolution of emotion and narrative. It is often known among writers that writing the closing of a play is harder than any other part. Arthur Schopenhauer wrote of Will and “Idea.” For Schopenhauer, in the true æsthetic experience, the subject and object are indistinguishable. Weebs do not perceive the ideal woman (2D waifu) or the idea of a woman, but the 2D waifu as idea. This is somewhat similar to Kant’s idea of disinterestedness. The structure of the Hero’s Journey, as explicated in Joseph Campbell‘s The Hero With A Thousand Faces, ends in catharsis. The hero begins in the known world, moves into the unknown, and returns transfigured. The perennial man, the perennial hero, is Christ. He is born from a virgin, embarks on his own journey of self-discovery, performs miracles, experiences humanity, suffers the passion, and then ascends to Heaven in perfect completeness. From the order and bliss of the Virgin Birth, to the chaos of the passion, then the catharsis of the Resurrection and ascent to Heaven.

We sat down for dinner and of course the conversation returned to politics.

The group I was with in some ways was a perfect sample of a modern population. There were two women, one a feminist-genderqueer-transexual-communist-vegan-atheist and the other a liberal-normie. The normling proclaimed that she was never having children, the F.G.T.C.V.A. agreed passionately and said she was going to sell her eggs. Ah! The modern woman really can have it all.

One thing that makes me laugh and become quite irritated at the same time is when vegans pretend to really enjoy vegan food. Perhaps they do, but when I see a vegan lift up a limp, withered, and sorry looking leaf to their mouth I don’t imagine it is better than a nice pork chop. When I see them roll their eyes up and melodramatically make “yummy” noises, followed by “mmm veggies, SO gooood” in a pseudo-Californian doggerel, I feel the spirit of the bog upon the face of the deep. Gluten-Free, Organic, Vegan, Low-Fat, Low-Sugar — God, I can’t take it anymore. All of these things are essentially female phenomena, men are often incapable of understanding why having organic potatoes is more important than inorganic (which makes them seem to be plastic potatoes synthetically produced in some laboratory) potatoes.

Vegan food to vegans is inherently virtuous, and this is why they are all new-age. There is no connection to real religion and so they concoct strange pseudo-religious rituals and ethical rules to fill the void left by the absence of Christianity. Rather than thanking God for their meal, they thank “brother lentil” and “sister cabbage”; rather than promoting moral or sexual purity there is a descent into materialism. They must be materially “pure” by only ingesting “pure” or “wholesome” food. Veganism is a pseduo-religious cult, and anyone that forgoes a rare and juicy steak to nibble on a parsnip is our of their mind.

My lifelong friend who I walk with every year (this year it’s Italy) is a Whig-turned-light-reactionary. Political issues are secondary to him now. After living through the 1968 student revolutions firsthand he now sees the destructiveness of those revolutions. He understands the break down of the family, the “cult of the individual,” and the rejection of religion as the causes of our decline. He rarely speaks out, and stoically endures the daily castigation from his liberal friends. He is the silent majority that see the way things are going and know intuitively that there is something not quite right.

We were in the late hours now and the conversation turned to the family. “Why should I look after the old?” one said, “Yes,” the other agreed, “I’ll put my parents in a home.” Ah, how sad, but this is the future the elderly chose on those Paris streets in 1968. My friend has traced back his English ancestry to 1500AD now and has observed that in pre-industrial society the generations were a golden thread that weaved through time. Now that thread has been cut and snipped into pieces. No longer are the grandfathers and grandsons one, but each generation vies for resource allocation from governments. Democracy fuels this division and this is just one of a multitude of ways that democracy feeds the ruin of the state.

He remembers sailing up the Thames as a boy in the “Crusaders,” a kind of Christian Boy Scouts. He has fond memories of the 1950s, and his father fought in the war. In fact, the reason we are going to Italy is to see the battlefields where his father fought. It is commonly known that people become more Right-wing as they get older. Death approaches; reality approaches, and they can no longer hide behind the language games of the Left. This genderfluid-vegan girl can only hide behind language because she is so far from death — silly little verbal games and pilpul cannot hide you from the divine light of judgement; there is nowhere to hide when you kneel before God’s throne and face justice. I’ll make a reactionary of my friend yet. We finished with a nice glass of wine and then I headed out to meet other friends. I closed the door behind me, lit a cigarette, collected my thoughts and walked into the city centre.


One thought on “A Genderqueer-Vegan Dinner Party: Logos & Will

  1. I once resembled your feminist, vegan, holier than though friends. I could never last more than 6 weeks on a vegan diet without feeling ill and weak, though. These are people who require a strong belief system to survive, and would have been Christian 50 years ago.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s